The Red Fleet: GOOD NIGHT ALT RIGHT!

[Collectivist Germania]

At least Fascism works :^)

Holodomor recognition when

[Mattopilos]

At least Fascism works :^)

Holodomor recognition when

That would be why Spain, Italy and Germany are all Fascist... Oh wait

[Schwarzewand]

At least Fascism works :^)

Holodomor recognition when

A bit of an aside: isn't one of the rules of your region "No Nazis?"

That's kind of a questionable choice for someone who describes themself as an "authentic National Socialist" and has "Sieg Heil!" in their sig.

[Collectivist Germania]

At least Fascism works :^)

Holodomor recognition when

That would be why Spain, Italy and Germany are all Fascist... Oh wait

And yet it took you how long to beat them?
Meanwhile, Russia is beaten by Arabs in pyjamas and collapses

>tfw i hate communism but still wish they won

[Collectivist Germania]

At least Fascism works :^)

Holodomor recognition when

A bit of an aside: isn't one of the rules of your region "No Nazis?"

That's kind of a questionable choice for someone who describes themself as an "authentic National Socialist" and has "Sieg Heil!" in their sig.

Aha, were you checking if I belonged to an alt-right region?
I don't force my views onto the others in the region and we all get along fine.

[Mattopilos]

That would be why Spain, Italy and Germany are all Fascist... Oh wait

And yet it took you how long to beat them?
Meanwhile, Russia is beaten by Arabs in pyjamas and collapses

>tfw i hate communism but still wish they won

The fact it no longer exists is enough to discredit the idea of "At least it works". Clearly something based on expansionism and Jingoism doesn't work much when it gets crushed by something that doesn't. Also, who is 'you'? I am not a Stalinist if that is what we are going for here.
Russia was not beaten by... what hell are you on about now. They were defeated by their own incompetence and wanting to uphold a one-party state based on forced collectivization. They basically went against their own goal (putting communism in their name then not wanting to dissolve the state is quite the strange thing to do, like North Korea calling itself "Democratic").

[Aimdar-Goomdar]

At least Fascism works :^)

Holodomor recognition when

That would be why Spain, Italy and Germany are all Fascist... Oh wait

Fascism never worked. It gives power to the select, but gives them even more power - which is exactly what Communism seeks to prevent.

Communism gives the power to the majority - directly. In a Republic, Representatives represent the people, while accepting the reality of Capitalism - which has multiple failure points.

[Mattopilos]

That would be why Spain, Italy and Germany are all Fascist... Oh wait

Fascism never worked. It gives power to the select, but gives them even more power - which is exactly what Communism seeks to prevent.

Communism gives the power to the majority - directly. In a Republic, Representatives represent the people, while accepting the reality of Capitalism - which has multiple failure points.

Exactly. That and it tends to rely on some select morality and idealism of some sort. Most of it decays into ethnic Jingoism and strives for "national purity".

[Aimdar-Goomdar]

And yet it took you how long to beat them?
Meanwhile, Russia is beaten by Arabs in pyjamas and collapses

>tfw i hate communism but still wish they won

The fact it no longer exists is enough to discredit the idea of "At least it works". Clearly something based on expansionism and Jingoism doesn't work much when it gets crushed by something that doesn't. Also, who is 'you'? I am not a Stalinist if that is what we are going for here.
Russia was not beaten by... what hell are you on about now. They were defeated by their own incompetence and wanting to uphold a one-party state based on forced collectivization. They basically went against their own goal (putting communism in their name then not wanting to dissolve the state is quite the strange thing to do, like North Korea calling itself "Democratic").

The USSR was crushed by Dictatorship, mainly because Stalin got impatient and disregarded Lenin, the true Communist of the Ages. Technically, Stalinism COULD work, but it would have to be a very people-regulated system - Stalin wouldn't have wanted to be the personification of his people, which he'd have to become for a so-called "Communist Dictatorship" to work effectively.

And that is why I refounded STALINIST and also left Nazi Europa. Fascism is simply flawed.

[Collectivist Germania]

And yet it took you how long to beat them?
Meanwhile, Russia is beaten by Arabs in pyjamas and collapses

>tfw i hate communism but still wish they won

The fact it no longer exists is enough to discredit the idea of "At least it works". Clearly something based on expansionism and Jingoism doesn't work much when it gets crushed by something that doesn't. Also, who is 'you'? I am not a Stalinist if that is what we are going for here.
Russia was not beaten by... what hell are you on about now. They were defeated by their own incompetence and wanting to uphold a one-party state based on forced collectivization. They basically went against their own goal (putting communism in their name then not wanting to dissolve the state is quite the strange thing to do, like North Korea calling itself "Democratic").

>implying that fascism = expansionism
Running out of soldiers doesn't make the system itself flawed, unless Communism supports the idea of sending millions of peasants into gunfire. The Soviet Battle Doctrine was just superior to Hitler's "no retreat" schmuck. It was a military strategic failure, in other words.
I was referring to the 80s Afghanistan War, if you were confused. That place soaks up economies like a sponge in war.

[Aimdar-Goomdar]

The fact it no longer exists is enough to discredit the idea of "At least it works". Clearly something based on expansionism and Jingoism doesn't work much when it gets crushed by something that doesn't. Also, who is 'you'? I am not a Stalinist if that is what we are going for here.
Russia was not beaten by... what hell are you on about now. They were defeated by their own incompetence and wanting to uphold a one-party state based on forced collectivization. They basically went against their own goal (putting communism in their name then not wanting to dissolve the state is quite the strange thing to do, like North Korea calling itself "Democratic").

>implying that fascism = expansionism
Running out of soldiers doesn't make the system itself flawed, unless Communism supports the idea of sending millions of peasants into gunfire. The Soviet Battle Doctrine was just superior to Hitler's "no retreat" schmuck. It was a military strategic failure, in other words.
I was referring to the 80s Afghanistan War, if you were confused. That place soaks up economies like a sponge in war.

The Soviet Battle Doctrine was carried out under the dictatorial USSR, which was never Communist except for about 6 months after the Russian Revolution.

This is why I created the Coalition Against Authoritarianism. I'm trying to get back on topic, guys...

[Mattopilos]

The fact it no longer exists is enough to discredit the idea of "At least it works". Clearly something based on expansionism and Jingoism doesn't work much when it gets crushed by something that doesn't. Also, who is 'you'? I am not a Stalinist if that is what we are going for here.
Russia was not beaten by... what hell are you on about now. They were defeated by their own incompetence and wanting to uphold a one-party state based on forced collectivization. They basically went against their own goal (putting communism in their name then not wanting to dissolve the state is quite the strange thing to do, like North Korea calling itself "Democratic").

>implying that fascism = expansionism
Running out of soldiers doesn't make the system itself flawed, unless Communism supports the idea of sending millions of peasants into gunfire. The Soviet Battle Doctrine was just superior to Hitler's "no retreat" schmuck. It was a military strategic failure, in other words.
I was referring to the 80s Afghanistan War, if you were confused. That place soaks up economies like a sponge in war.

No, the fact it thinks that the best way to spread its ideology is to basically fuck over countries through direct military action is flawed. That tends to draw the conclusion of being an asshole. That has nothing to do with the issue of "Running out of soldiers" - you just added that yourself with me making no mention of it.
Again, why are we conflating what I am saying with the Soviet Union? I don't support it. This seems like quite the strawman battle of painting me as some Stalinist and attacking "Stalinist Matt", when I have no agreement with them on almost every level.

[Mattopilos]

>implying that fascism = expansionism
Running out of soldiers doesn't make the system itself flawed, unless Communism supports the idea of sending millions of peasants into gunfire. The Soviet Battle Doctrine was just superior to Hitler's "no retreat" schmuck. It was a military strategic failure, in other words.
I was referring to the 80s Afghanistan War, if you were confused. That place soaks up economies like a sponge in war.

The Soviet Battle Doctrine was carried out under the dictatorial USSR, which was never Communist except for about 6 months after the Russian Revolution.

This is why I created the Coalition Against Authoritarianism. I'm trying to get back on topic, guys...

Sorry, but the moment a fascist comes into a discussion and paints people as Stalinists and an inflammatory comment based on a genocide of a people in the Ukraine, I think "Getting back on topic" is going to be in vain.

[Collectivist Germania]

>implying that fascism = expansionism
Running out of soldiers doesn't make the system itself flawed, unless Communism supports the idea of sending millions of peasants into gunfire. The Soviet Battle Doctrine was just superior to Hitler's "no retreat" schmuck. It was a military strategic failure, in other words.
I was referring to the 80s Afghanistan War, if you were confused. That place soaks up economies like a sponge in war.

No, the fact it thinks that the best way to spread its ideology is to basically fuck over countries through direct military action is flawed. That tends to draw the conclusion of being an asshole. That has nothing to do with the issue of "Running out of soldiers" - you just added that yourself with me making no mention of it.
Again, why are we conflating what I am saying with the Soviet Union? I don't support it. This seems like quite the strawman battle of painting me as some Stalinist and attacking "Stalinist Matt", when I have no agreement with them on almost every level.

That's a very simplistic way of looking at history. Hitler didn't wake up one morning and say "Hey, let's take Poland" or "Hmmm, France is looking a bit too democratic for my liking." I pointed out the issue of running out of soldiers because it's relevant to why Germany lost, not whether you did or didn't mention it.
I wouldn't call this a battle either. I'm not out to convert anybody, I just saw the "We don't talk to puppets" thing here and got awfully amused at how serious everybody is - online with strangers, mind you. So I came here to poke the bear and see what happens, if you get me.
Edit: You're not a Stalinist, cool. I'm not exactly going to punch you in the face for being whatever so let's not get wound up on who's what.

[Mattopilos]

No, the fact it thinks that the best way to spread its ideology is to basically fuck over countries through direct military action is flawed. That tends to draw the conclusion of being an asshole. That has nothing to do with the issue of "Running out of soldiers" - you just added that yourself with me making no mention of it.
Again, why are we conflating what I am saying with the Soviet Union? I don't support it. This seems like quite the strawman battle of painting me as some Stalinist and attacking "Stalinist Matt", when I have no agreement with them on almost every level.

That's a very simplistic way of looking at history. Hitler didn't wake up one morning and say "Hey, let's take Poland" or "Hmmm, France is looking a bit too democratic for my liking." I pointed out the issue of running out of soldiers because it's relevant to why Germany lost, not whether you did or didn't mention it.
I wouldn't call this a battle either. I'm not out to convert anybody, I just saw the "We don't talk to puppets" thing here and got awfully amused at how serious everybody is - online with strangers, mind you. So I came here to poke the bear and see what happens, if you get me.

Well, the fact remains he DID make that decision in the end. Clearly he had Poland as an objective to the spreading of his power. He didn't do it out of the kindness of his heart. And the issue was Hitler thought he could win on two fronts, leading to the aforementioned running out of soldiers.
Hmm, I see that as someone I know being kinda annoyed by someone wanting a discussion, but not willing to "place themselves in the discussion", so to speak. Given how... absurd some threads become, I don't disagree with them. Puppets are used all the time to make sure the "main" nation is not called out for the things they have said. This would be different if they linked to the main nation, but clearly they are hiding themselves from further criticism by placing another nation in the place of theirs.

[Collectivist Germania]

That's a very simplistic way of looking at history. Hitler didn't wake up one morning and say "Hey, let's take Poland" or "Hmmm, France is looking a bit too democratic for my liking." I pointed out the issue of running out of soldiers because it's relevant to why Germany lost, not whether you did or didn't mention it.
I wouldn't call this a battle either. I'm not out to convert anybody, I just saw the "We don't talk to puppets" thing here and got awfully amused at how serious everybody is - online with strangers, mind you. So I came here to poke the bear and see what happens, if you get me.

Well, the fact remains he DID make that decision in the end. Clearly he had Poland as an objective to the spreading of his power. He didn't do it out of the kindness of his heart. And the issue was Hitler thought he could win on two fronts, leading to the aforementioned running out of soldiers.
Hmm, I see that as someone I know being kinda annoyed by someone wanting a discussion, but not willing to "place themselves in the discussion", so to speak. Given how... absurd some threads become, I don't disagree with them. Puppets are used all the time to make sure the "main" nation is not called out for the things they have said. This would be different if they linked to the main nation, but clearly they are hiding themselves from further criticism by placing another nation in the place of theirs.

You are correct on the two-front war. From a strategic point of view, if he had not withheld his forces in Dunkirk, he could have effortlessly annihilated the British forces there and invaded an unguarded Britain. However, I have to disagree with your point on Poland - on minor points however. It can be argued that it was done out of benevolence as the German peoples living in Poland were being persecuted harshly (post-war sentiments contributed greatly, nobody feels racist "just because") as well as the fact that eastern Poland was formerly German clay. This wasn't so much expansionism, more along the lines of spitting on the terms dictated by the opposition in WW1, take that decision as you may.
I personally find it concerning that someone has to make a puppet to avoid backlash. People disagree, that's fine, but it should be left at that, imho.

[Sedgistan]

Threadjack split from the main thread. The three primary participants in this, Collectivist Germania, Mattopilos and Aimdar-Goomdar are all *** warned for threadjacking. *** There's been far too much of that going on in Gameplay recently.